Event Comment: Benefit for the Author [of mainpiece, who is named in the Account-Book, but not on the playbill]. "The Captives were set at liberty last night, amidst roars of laughter. I see the doctor [i.e. the author] publishes it this week . . . Cadell bought this sublime piece before it appeared, for fifty pounds, agreeing to make it a hundred on its third representation. It has been played three times, and I dare say old Sanctimony will have no remorse in taking the other fifty." J. P. Kemble to Edmond Malone (Life of Edmond Malone, by Sir James Prior, i860, p. 126). Receipts: #138 13s. 6d. (91/19/0; 40/18/0; 5/16/6; tickets: none listed) (charge: #105)

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; T 5, by William Henry Ireland; incidental music by William Linley. Prologue by Sir James Bland Burges; Epilogue by Robert Merry (see text)]: With new Scenes, Dresses & Decorations. The Scenes designed and excuted by Greenwood and Capon. The Dresses by Johnston, Gay & Miss Rein. Printed slip attached to Kemble playbill: A malevolent and impotent attack on the Shakspeare MSS. [i.e. those forged by W. H. Ireland, of which this play was one] having appeared, on the Eve of representation of Vortigern, evidently intended to injure the interest of the Proprietor of the MSS., Mr Samuel? Ireland [W. H. Ireland's father] feels it impossible, within the short space of time that intervenes between the publishing and the representation, to produce an answer to the most illiberal and unfounded assertions in Mr Malone's enquiry [i.e. Edmond Malone, An Inquiry into the Authenticity of certain Papers attributed to Shakspeare, Queen Elizabeth, and Henry, Earl of Southampton, 1796]. He is therefore induced to request that Vortigern may be heard With that Candour that has ever distinguished a British Audience. The Play is now at the Press, and will in a very few days be laid before the Public. [But it was not issued until 1799 (see below). See also Bernard Grebanier, The Great Shakespeare Forgery, London, 1966.] 4 Apr., states that the first three acts were listened to with patience, but beginning with the fourth act the play was damned, when "one tremendous yell of indignation from the pit burst simultaneously." "At four o'clock the doors of the theatre were besieged; and, a few minutes after they were opened, the pit was crowded solely with gentlemen. Before six not a place was to be found in the boxes, and the passages were filled...The audience betrayed symptoms of impatience early in the representation; but, finding its taste insulted by bloated terms, which heightened the general insipidity, its reason puzzled by discordant images, false ornaments, and abortive efforts to elevate and astonish, pronounced its sentence of condemnation at the conclusion of the play" (Gentleman's Magazine, Apr. 1795, pp. 346-47). "Irelands play of Vortigern I went to. Prologue spoken at 35 minutes past 6 [see 29 Mar.]: Play over at 10. A strong party was evidently made to support it, which clapped without opposition frequently through near 3 acts, when some ridiculous passages caused a laugh, mixed with groans-Kemble requested the audience t o hear the play out abt. the end of 4th act and prevailed.-The Epilogue was spoken by Mrs Jordan who skipped over some lines which claimed the play as Shakespeares. Barrymore attempted to give the Play out for Monday next but was hooted off the stage. Kemble then came on, & after some time, was permitted to say that "School for Scandal would be given," which the House approved by clapping. Sturt of Dorsetshire was in a Stage Box drunk, & exposed himself indecently to support the Play, and when one of the stage attendants attempted to take up the green cloth [i.e. a carpet which, by custom, was laid on the stage during the concluding scene of a tragedy], Sturt seized him roughly by the head. He was slightly pelted with oranges" (Joseph Farington, Diary, 1922, I, 145). Account-Book, 4 Apr.: Paid Ireland his share for the 1st Night of Vortigern #102 13s. 3d. Morning Chronicle, 29 Mar. 1799: This Day is published Vortigern and Henry the Second (4s.). Receipts: #555 6s. 6d. (528.6.0; 26.9.6; 0.11.0)

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of this production is determined by a letter (see below). For a discussion of the origin and development of this play, see Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, pp. 274-76. A song, Why shou'd the world mistake, the music composed by John Eccles and sung by Mrs Hudson, is in Thesaurus Musicus, 1695. An unidentified letter, 22 March 1693@4: We had another new play yesterday, called The Ambitious Slave, or a Generous Revenge. Elkanah Settle is the author of it, and the success is answerable to his reputation. I never saw a piece so wretched, nor worse contrived. He pretends 'tis a Persian story, but not one body in the whole audience could make any thing of it; 'tis a mere babel, and will sink for ever. The poor poet, seeing the house would not act it for him, and give him the benefit of the third day, made a present of it to the women in tie house, who act it, but without profit or incouragement (Edmond Malone, An Historical Account of the Stage in Plays and Poems of William Shakespeare [London, 1821], III, 163-64). Gentleman's Journal, March 1694: 'Tis not altogether strange for a Play to be less kindly receiv'd, immediately after one that has deservedly ingross'd all the Applause which the Town can well bestow in some time on new Dramatic Entertainments. Perhaps Mr Settle may partly impute to this, the want of success of a new Tragedy of his which was lately acted, 'tis called, The Ambitious Slave; or, The Generous Revenge. [This play followed Southerne's The Fatal Marriage.

Event Comment: An unidentified letter, 22 March 1693@4. There is hardly anything now to make it acceptable to you, but an account of our winter diversions, and chiefly of the new plays which have been the entertainment of the town. The first that was acted was Mr Congreve's, called The Double Dealer [see October 1693]. It has fared with that play, as it generally does with beauties officiously cried up: the mighty expectation which was raised of it made it sink, even beneath its own merit. The character of The Double Dealer is artfully writt, but the action being but single, and confined within the rules of true comedy, it could not please the generality of our audience, who relish nothing but variety, and think any thing dull and heavy which does not border upon farce.--The criticks were severe upon this play, which gave the author occasion to lash 'em in his Epistle Dedicatory, in so defying or hectoring a style, that it was counted rude even by his best friends; so that 'tis generally thought he has done his business, and lost himself: a thing he owes to Mr Dryden's treacherous friendship, who being jealous of the applause he had gott by his Old Batchelour, deluded him into a foolish imitation of his own way of writing angry prefaces. The 2d play is Mr Dryden's, called Love Triumphant, or Nature will prevail [see 15 January 1694]. It is a tragi-comedy, but in my opinion one of the worst he ever writt, if not the very worst: the comical part descends beneath the style and shew of a Bartholomew-fair droll. It was damn'd by the universal cry of the town, nemine contradicente, but the conceited poet. He says in his prologue, that this is the last the town must expect from him; he had done himself a kindness had he taken his leave before. The 3d is Mr Southern's call'd The Fatal Marriage, or the Innocent Adultery [see February 1693@4]. It is not only the best that author ever writt, but is generally admired for one of the greatest ornaments of the stage, and the most entertaining play has appeared upon it these 7 years. The plot is taken from Mrs Behn's novel, called the Unhappy Vow-Breaker. I never saw Mrs Barry act with so much passion as she does in it; I could not forbear being moved even to tears to see her act. Never was poet better rewarded or incouraged by the town; for besides an extraordinary full house, which brought him about 140 #. 50 noblemen, among whom my Lord Winchelsea, was one, give him guineas apiece, and the printer 36 #. for his copy. This kind usage will encourage desponding minor poets, and vex huffing Dryden and Congreve to madness. [For the fourth play, see 21 March 1693@4; Edmond Malone, Plays and Poems of William Shakespeare (London, 1821), III, 162-64.

Event Comment: It is not certain what company produced this play, if it was acted; and it may not have been staged. A manuscript note on Bodleian Malone 116 attributes it to Southby. As the play was advertised in the Post Boy, 2-4 March 1696@7, and as a copy in the Library of Congress bears the manuscript date of 10 March 1696@7, the play, if produced, was probably first acted not later than February 1696@7

Event Comment: PPanton St. Benefit Malone. 2s. 6d., 2s., 1s., 6d

Event Comment: The Characters all New Dress'd. A new Comedy [by Dr Benjamin Hoadly] never before acted. [The previous July Garrick had been entertained by the Rev. Dr John Hoadly at Alresford and carried on a pleasant correspondence with him afterwards. In his letter 19 Aug. 1746 (Folger) he wrote]: I had the pleasure of the Doctor's company [brother Benjamin Hoadly] to supper at my lodgings the night before I set out for this place; we talk'd about Ranger, but whether he will appear next winter or sleep forever in ye scritore, is not yet determined: 'tis pit, faith. [That this friendship was exceedingly profitable to Garrick is indicated by the fact that Benjamin Hoadly seems to have turned over the profits from the three author's nights to Garrick. (1) Garrick by a bargain with John Rich received #80 advance cash and promised to pay nightly charges (3rd, 6th, & 9th nights) of #60, and (2) to divide equally the remaining profits on those nights. The agreement was drawn 27 Dec. 1746. Garrick noted on this document]: N.B. the copy of the play is my own, and the profit arising from the printing of it. [Hoadly seems to have received only the #100 given him by George II for dedicating the printed copy to him.] [Settlement for the three performances was made 6 April. Total receipts for those nights (14, 18, 21 Feb.) was #570 11s. Total expenses were #182 2s. (including #2 2s. for the licensing). The profit of #388 9s. was equally divided and Garrick received his #194 4s. 6d. on that day. He had received the other #80 the day before the play opened, 11 Feb. 1747. See documents in Folger, Holograph Letters of David Garrick, p. 38, seemingly Edmund Malone's copy, of BM Add MSS 21508.] Receipts: #205 9s. 6d

Event Comment: Gift for ye Sufferers by ye fire in Cornhill (Cross). [A column and a half "Letter to the Author" appeared in the General Advertiser this day, laying historical background for Ford's Lover's Melancholy]. The history of the stage before the Restoration is like a Foreign Land, in which no Englishman had ever travelled; we know there were such things as Playhouses, and one Shakespear a great writer, but the historical traces of them are so imperfect, that the manner in which they existed is less known to us, than that of Eschylus or the theatres of Greece. For this reason, 'tis hoped that the following Gleaning of Theatrical History will readily obtain a place in your paper. 'Tis taken from a Pamphlet written in the reign of Charles I, with this quaint title, "Old Ben's Light Heart made heavy by young John's Melancholly Lover"; and as it contains some historical anecdotes and altercations concerning Ben Johnson, Ford, Shakespear, and the Lover's Melancholy it is imagined that a few extracts from it at this juncture, will not be unentertaining to the Public. [The substance of the remainder retails Jonson's critical cantankerousness and his wounded pride at the failure of the New Inn, quoting some epigrams made at Jonson's expense on his allegation that Ford was a plagiary. This second "puff" for the play, presumably also written by Macklin, formed the basis for a Steevens-Malone controversy late in the century, centering on the existence or nonexistence of the pamphlet referred to by Macklin as "Old Ben's Light Heart made Heavy, &c." A summary account of the evidence appears in the Dramatic Works of John Ford, by Henry Weber (Edinburgh, 1811) I, Intro. XVI, XXXI.] Receipts: #210 (Cross); #208 1s. (Powel)

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; T 5, by Robert Jephson. Prologue by the author (Gentleman's Magazine, Jan, 1782, p. 36). Another Prologue, by the Right Hon. Luke Gardiner, "not arriving in London time enough for the first exhibition of the Count of Narbonne, was not spoken" (ibid.). Epilogue by Richard Josceline Goodenough, but beginning with 20 Nov. it was superseded by a new Epilogue written by Edmond Malone (see text)]: With new Scenery and Dresses. Public Advertiser, 1 Nov.: The Management of The Count of Narbonne is . . . under very good Care: Mr Horace Walpole, with a Fondness nothing less than fatherly, directs that part of the Affair which respects the Scenes and Dresses, while Henderson takes Charge of the Rehearsals and the casting of inferior Parts... [Henderson] is to wear a Dress which is lent him from among the Antiquities at Strawberry Hill. "I have been at the theatre, and compromised the affair of the epilogues: one is to be spoken to-morrow, the friend's on the author's night. I have been tumbling into trap-doors, seeing dresses tried on in the green-room, and directing armour in the painting-room" (Walpole [16 Nov. 1781], XII, 95). "I never saw a more unprejudiced audience, nor more attention. There was not the slightest symptom of disapprobation to any part ... It is impossible to say how much justice Miss Younge did to your writing. She has shown herself a great mistress of her profession, mistress of dignity, passion, and of all the sentiments you have put into her hands. The applause given to her description of Raymond's death lasted some minutes, and recommenced; and her scene in the fourth act, after the Count's ill-usage, was played in the highest perfection. Mr Henderson was far better than I excepted from his weakness, and from his rehearsal yesterday, with which he was much discontented himself. Mr Wroughton was very animated, and played the part of the Count much better than any man now on the stage would have done. I wish I could say Mr Lewis satisfied me; and that poor child Miss Satchell was very inferior to what she appeared at the rehearsals, where the total silence and our nearness deceived us. Her voice has no strength, nor is she yet at all mistress of the stage. I have begged Miss Younge to try what she can do with her by Monday. However, there is no danger to your play: it is fully established" (Walpole [to the author, 18 Nov. 1781], XII, 95-96). Public Advertiser, 28 Nov. 1781: This Day is published The Count of Narbonne (price not listed). Receipts: #164 10s. 6d. (163/0/6; 1/10/0)

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; T 5, by Robert Jephson. Prologue by Edmond Malone. Epilogue by John Courtenay (see text)]: With new Dresses, Decorations, &c. Public Advertiser, 18 Dec. 1787: This Day is published Julia (1s. 6d.). Receipts: #217 2s. 6d. (201.5.0; 15.11.0; 0.6.6)

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Performed but once [on 14 Apr. 1787]. With new Dresses, Decorations, &c. [Prologue by Edmond Malone; Epilogue by John Courtenay (see text). Afterpiece in place of The First Floor, advertised on playbill of 10 Dec.] Receipt2: #223 10s. (195.13.0; 27.8.6; 0.8.6)